Why Does the Recently Adopted Performance Measurement System in Indonesian Local Government Not Work?

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to gain insight on the implementation of a newly adopted Performance Measurement System (PMS) in Sabang local government-Indonesia. It is a case study based qualitative research which was carried out at the local government of Sabang. Data were collected through document analysis, questionnaires, and followed by semi-structure interviews. The questionnaires were distributed to key officers of 7 working unit/departments (or Satuan Kerja Perangkat Daerah) out of 31 departments in total within the city of Sabang. The interviewees are head of the departments, the secretary, head of program and reporting division of each working unit. The data were analyzed by using qualitative data analysis technique. The institutional theory was used as a basis for analyzing and discussing the results obtained. This study uncovers that the PMS concept and functions have not fully understood by most of the key officers. Consequently, the recently developed PMS is not utilized optimally and thus it does not contribute to a better performance management system of the local government. The reasons why it is now work well are incapacity of the human resource, unclear job description, lack of organizational commitment and the absence of the performance evaluation. Thus, it can be concluded that pre-requirements and precondition need to be fulfilled before adopting a new PMS, especially where the PMS is not initiated by the organization itself, rather imposed by the central government or other organization.

Predictors of strategic procurement performance metrics adoption in county governments: empirical evidence from Kakamega county government, Kenya

“…This implies that increase in national government support is likely to decrease the adoption of SPPM at county governments. This finding contradicts many previous studies which found a positive and significant association (Fahlevi et al., 2018; Gowon, Rohman, Basuki, & Fortunasri, 2018; Eliuz et al., 2017; Brusca & Montesinos, 2016).…”

“…From this model, compulsory performance measurement requirement from national government and nationwide database on public procurement performance in counties were found to have no relation with adoption of SPPM. These findings uniquely stand out among previous studies (Fahlevi et al. , 2018; Gowon et al.…”

“…Eliuz et al. (2017) findings and conclusion are contradictory to other studies by Brusca and Montesinos (2016) and Fahlevi et al. (2018), which found that central government involvement and support directly led to the adoption and utilization of strategic performance metrics.…”

“…Similar findings were also reported by Brusca and Montesinos (2016) who learned that the level of utilization of outcome and impact metrics was high in countries where national government was directly involved in PMS of subnational governments. Additionally, both Fahlevi et al. (2018) and Akbar et al.…”

“…Such external pressure emanates from electorates, national government, regulatory framework, donors and other international partners. Studies in other countries have shown that national government, and legal framework affects performance measurement and reporting in subnational governments (Brusca & Montesinos, 2016; Fahlevi, Nuzulla, & Basri, 2018). As such, this study anchored on the institutional theory, attempted to examine the effect of national government support and legal framework on adoption of SPPM in county governments in Kenya.…”